I just thought that was amusing, like within seconds, olbermann and co. are all out in full force claiming it's beck's/palin's/o'reilly's fault.

How exactly? The guy whom shot up the place listed as one of his favorite books on his youtube profile as "The communist manifesto". You see any teabagger having that in their library? let alone listing it as their "favorite" of anything. Dude volunteered for Kerry in 04 too and was a pothead. Last I check the far right is very much against the legalization of marijuana. He also DESPISED the bush administration, and from his classmates words rambled on about that.

typical though, they have to find a scapegoat. Like the columbine kids, the guys who killed themselves listening to judas priest, etc. It can't just be a common sense answer like "Well, they were whackjobs", or "no one else was paying attention to them". Nope.

And shame on them for trying to politicize such a thing and further their stupid agenda. 6 PEOPLE DIED and yet I havn't heard one damn peep about it, it's all about trying to blame someone for this, and not about mourning the loss of this tragedy and making sure this scumbag ever sees natural sunlight for the rest of his life.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

GodHatesClevelandSport wrote:Since the nutjob wasn't following Palin's wishes, it's OK for Palin, Angle, et al, to continue with their gun imagery directed toward their political opponents. Ramp up the rhetoric!

That is all.

When Democrats use language like this—or even harsher language like Mr. Obama's famous remark, in Philadelphia during the 2008 campaign, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"—it's just evidence of high spirits, apparently. But if Republicans do it, it somehow creates a climate of hate.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

When the left finally admits that Ft. Hood was an act of Islamic terrorism, then we can talk about whether a pothead who hated Bush and volunteered for the Kerry campaign committed an act of conservative terrorism (spoiler alert: he didn't). Until then, I refuse to even have an "argument."

It would be like talking about Schumur as the next head coach with someone who is arguing for Romeo Crenell to keep his job.

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts. -----Lars

GodHatesClevelandSport wrote:Since the nutjob wasn't following Palin's wishes, it's OK for Palin, Angle, et al, to continue with their gun imagery directed toward their political opponents. Ramp up the rhetoric!

That is all.

Surely a map with frowning faces instead of gun sights would have prevented this tragedy.

The only issue with the rhetoric is that is prevents real things from being done and people could probably work together if they didn't have to defend their compromises to their bases, not that it incites violence.

Any violence that occurs because of any of the rhetoric should be blamed directly on the mentally deranged idiot that thinks murdering a 9-year old is something that should be done, no one else.

GodHatesClevelandSport wrote:Since the nutjob wasn't following Palin's wishes, it's OK for Palin, Angle, et al, to continue with their gun imagery directed toward their political opponents. Ramp up the rhetoric!

That is all.

Surely a map with frowning faces instead of gun sights would have prevented this tragedy.

The only issue with the rhetoric is that is prevents real things from being done and people could probably work together if they didn't have to defend their compromises to their bases, not that it incites violence.

Any violence that occurs because of any of the rhetoric should be blamed directly on the mentally deranged idiot that thinks murdering a 9-year old is something that should be done, no one else.

Maybe he listend to rock music. Or played video games. Clearly its someones fault besides the person who actually did it.

Pass the buck, pass the blame. The liberal way. Complete lack of personal responsibility and accountability. Why do something yourself when you can get the government to do it for you in twice the time and for 10 times the cost?

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts. -----Lars

GodHatesClevelandSport wrote:I understand. You believe politicians should ramp up their rhetoric and continue with their murder analogies while campaigning. Understood.

I don't give a shit what they do as long as they don't screw things up worse. They can say what they want on campaigns, any use of the word reload, battle or sights during a campaign is figurative not literal. Anyone who takes it literally is a moron.

GodHatesClevelandSport wrote:I understand. You believe politicians should ramp up their rhetoric and continue with their murder analogies while campaigning. Understood.

I don't give a shit what they do as long as they don't screw things up worse. They can say what they want on campaigns, any use of the word reload, battle or sights during a campaign is figurative not literal. Anyone who takes it literally is a moron.

Unfortunately, there are many morons.

I believe our politicians should be leaders. Those with national platforms need to stand up and speak out against this nonsense.

Sadly, we've been lacking in political leadership for some time. Especially in Ohio.

ASHEVILLE, N.C. (AP) — A North Carolina congressman says he'll carry a gun when he attends public events in his district's mountain communities after last weekend's assassination attempt on one of his colleagues.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote: Criminals don't get guns from gunshops, they get them illegaly.......because they're fucking criminals.

At one point they were purchased legally. If you get rid of them all, then it becomes much more difficult to steal them in the first place. If the numbers Ziner was quoting from Chicago are correct, seems like pretty solid evidence to me.

I'm just stirring the pot. Bad things will always happen, but we can reduce the chances in most cases.

Really, what else does someone need a handgun for but to conceal it and shoot people?

Cerebral_DownTime wrote: Criminals don't get guns from gunshops, they get them illegaly.......because they're fucking criminals.

At one point they were purchased legally. If you get rid of them all, then it becomes much more difficult to steal them in the first place. If the numbers Ziner was quoting from Chicago are correct, seems like pretty solid evidence to me.

I'm just stirring the pot. Bad things will always happen, but we can reduce the chances in most cases.

Really, what else does someone need a handgun for but to conceal it and shoot people?

Haha, I was being a jackass. Chicago's murder rate is 15.6 per 100,000, LA is 13.4 per 100K and NYC is 7 per 100K. Sorry I should have thrown in an emoticon or something to show my sarcasm.

While not the highest, Chicago is certainly up there even after 28 years of prohibiting handguns.

Are you serious with the last comment? My dad is finally getting around to bringing the handgun he got for me out in a few months. I couldn't have it in Chicago when be bought it, but I am certainly excited to have it and take it out to the range and shoot it. No real intentions to conceal it and certainly none to shoot someone. When not in use it will be locked up...though probably in my nightstand.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:There is no one to blame but the person who pulled the trigger. You cannot stop crazy people from doing crazy things.

But we could outlaw handguns, you Heston-loving, gun-toting vigilante. Easier to see a gun walking in with a shotty/rifle than a Glock.

Banning handguns wouldn't prevent this type of person from accomplishing their goal. The fact of the matter is the guy has some legit mental issues, you might say he is crazy, crazy people are not stopped by these absurd boundaries and limits that a handgun banning would implement. I don't mean to sound cold or unsympathetic to the innocent victims here but maybe we should be glad he could get his hands on a gun, b/c if he couldn't it is scary to think of what alternatives he might have used (and how many more victims there might be). Banning handguns would make it more difficult for people like you and I to commit a crime like this, but people like you and I don't commit crimes like this 99.99% of the time.

So Erie, with all do respect, keep things in the correct context.

Last edited by FUDU on Mon Jan 10, 2011 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

I mostly trying to get a rise out of you guys, but I am serious about the last comment. I see no reason for the average citizen to have a handgun.

I know that banning them wouldn't stop it from happening. I said that.

I'm of the opinion that if you want to stop people from coming into your house at night, get an alarm system and some dogs. In fact, keep a loaded shotgun leaning up in the corner if it makes you sleep better at night.

We've hashed this out a few times before, so I won't go into a diatribe on the subject. It's just a real bad thing that happened, and while not caused by handguns, they certainly played an integral part.

Handguns are fun to shoot, have you ever shot one? Find a range, you can most likely rent one there, give it a try. Something very cool about it even shooting at a stationary bullseye.

I do believe that a shotgun is probably a better home defense tool other than that fact you cant slip it in to a drawer. For some reason my wife is against just leaving my shotgun in the corner of our bedroom... guess it messes with the feng shui or something.

I will tell you another use that I plan for my gun. Ever hike in the rocky mountains? A few stories about bears or mountain lions will make you much more cautious. Can't hardly hike with a shotgun on my hip.

Ziner wrote:I will tell you another use that I plan for my gun. Ever hike in the rocky mountains? A few stories about bears or mountain lions will make you much more cautious. Can't hardly hike with a shotgun on my hip.

How about a cow bell and some bear mace? Or a .30-.30 on a sling? I get it, I really do. I like guns too, but the cons seem to outweigh the pros for me.

Anyone who shoots an animal from a helicopter is a stupid cunt. So Sarah Palin is a stupid cunt.

And the reason I want to own a handgun is because I love to target shoot and I have the right to.

If someone breaks into my house i'd rather fire a 9mm at him than a .308, i'd really prefer not to kill my neighbor because a high caliber rifle round went through my wall like a hot knife thru butter.

How many people are killed by people who can't drive for shit? Well i'd bet if we banned cars DUI and other car related deaths would drop.

I mostly trying to get a rise out of you guys, but I am serious about the last comment. I see no reason for the average citizen to have a handgun.

I know that banning them wouldn't stop it from happening. I said that.

I'm of the opinion that if you want to stop people from coming into your house at night, get an alarm system and some dogs. In fact, keep a loaded shotgun leaning up in the corner if it makes you sleep better at night.

We've hashed this out a few times before, so I won't go into a diatribe on the subject. It's just a real bad thing that happened, and while not caused by handguns, they certainly played an integral part.

If everyone was an average citzen, I might buy into that argument.

But each and every day there are many more people who are not "average citizens"

The right to protect yourself, protect who you love and protect what you work for....that onus on the individual at an ever increasing rate.

It's better to be proactive in dealing with those that have no value for life.

I'm not a Moderate Republican, but a full out Neo-Con Conservative Hack and I hate Palin. If she runs against Obama I just can't vote. I'm going Robert Redford did on Bush winning a second term.

The elites are right on this one... She is a moron, and a populist of the moment. Her and Beck should be much less "seen". <-Keeping down that rhetoric and hyperbole in case that Arizona Sheriff is watching...

"When a man with money meets a man with experience, the man with experience leaves with money and the man with money leaves with experience."

The media has just taken this shit to a whole new low (if that's possible). They need to blame someone, my suggestion would be the prick that pulled the trigger. He fired 31 shots that either means he re-loaded or he had the super extended mag.

This nutjub was all over the political map, blaming one side for it is pretty stupid.

The thread clearly states that Sarah Palin shot the congresswoman. That is what was told to me by Olbermann, Thom Hartman, and Chris Matthews.

I was listening to some liberal talk radio from my way back skiing today (I am also a cutter) and it was hilarious to hear how delusional these people are. Every god damn thing they try to put on Limbaugh and Palin's lap was the same damn thing they were doing. This doesnt even include the host's being completely incorrect on some facts and continually presenting them as truth (The judge wasn't jewish) or the callers who bring up the most randomly absurd things and present them as facts and they run with them. I used to at least have the perception that on the whole the far left made the argument more intelligently than the far right, but today was nothing but gutter radio as have been the majority of the left pundits for since the shooting.

From listening to lefty commentators like Paul Krugman, George Packer, and Jonathan Chait among others, you'd think the "incivility" they lament began on 1/20/09.

Memories are short, and denial ain't just a river in Egypt, however.

Set aside for now the fact that the most prominent liberal blogger in the world, Markos Moulitsas (Daily Kos) used identical target images on his website (even targeting Giffords' district as one of his targets (she's too moderate a Dem to suit him), and that the DLC used the same exact map with crosshairs image on their website. (Both have removed those images since the AZ shooting, but we have screenshots of them). No one on the right that I'm aware of has been twisted enough to blame them for the AZ shootings. But it is evidence of their mind-numbing hypocrisy, their selective outrage, and their disgusting exploitation of tragedy, and so is worth noting.

It is amazing that these folks can express outrage over the ubiquitous martial references in political language (battleground states...targeted districts...campaigns) and twist them into incitements to violence to score political points before the bodies are even cold....but somehow, the very real, actual incitements to violence that were all the rage from 2000-2008 are washed down the memory hole, failing as they do to support the preferred leftist narrative of conservatives as haters.

Could you imagine, for example, a feature film getting wide national release (143 theaters) fantasizing about the assassination of our current president? Or dozens of signs at political protest events in America calling explicitly for him to be killed? Or photos and bumper stickers depicting Obama with his head in a noose? Or mock-ups of a guillotine, with Obama's severed head in a basket?

Right...it's almost unimaginable, and it hasn't happened.

But these two links should serve to refresh the memory. Remember the outrage from Paul Krugman at the time? Me neither.

Somehow no conservative has pointed to these many many explicit expressions of leftist hatred and unmistakable incitement to violence to suggest they inspired the AZ shooter. Because that would be stupid and illogical. He looks to be a classic case of paranoid schizophrenia. To the extent he has a political ideology, it is incoherent.

But to proclaim, as Krugman and others have done, that the climate of violence has been fed "overwhelmingly from the right" is a demonstrable and/or delusional lie.

Where, I would ask, is the conservative counterpart to the open hatred and calls for direct violence to political leaders demonstrated at those two links?

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

I do love the notion that Palin keeps using the phrase "blood libel", implying that she has any clue whatsoever as he origins of that phrase is.

Where, I would ask, is the conservative counterpart to the open hatred and calls for direct violence to political leaders demonstrated at those two links?

Do you really want to do the "he said, she said" bullshit? Do you want to go down that road? I can dig up link after link of violent rhetoric used by the Right......... But it has nothing to with this incident. And you're saying a Michell Malkin site doesn't have pictures of some of the awful signs carried at every Tea Party rally? NO EFFIN WAY!

Just who are you trying to convince?

You're only repsonse is to point the finger just like those you denounce. Instead both parties should admit they say piles of stupid shit and try to tone it down.

I get the feeling that Republicans want to be blamed so they can play the victim.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I get the feeling that Republicans want to be blamed so they can play the victim.

DING DING DING!

Actually, I'd take it back a step and say Republican honks want to be blamed... And Democrat honks play along, suppling the insinuation of the forbidden thought, just to shine in the light of controversy.

The honks take turns. It's the oldest play in the book. It's shameless, but unfortunately it works.

It was media voices from the left blaming the shootings on the rhetoric of the right, not the other way around...and I didn't engage in any of that in tit-for-tat fashion. I think we'll see it die down after Obama's fine and proper speech last night...and after conservatives stood up and showed how incoherent and unfounded the charge was.

I stand by my point that when it comes to violent rhetoric and incitement to violence against political leaders, the political left takes a back seat to no one...in terms of volume and in terms of degree. I believe I have demonstrated that, and that's all I wanted to do.

"I am only one, but I am one...."

"I believe it is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting." H.L. Mencken

It's kind of funny that Sarah Palin gets accused of fostering a "climate of hate" considering some of the unbelievably vile, vicious and yes, hateful things that have been directed at her since she came onto the scene.

I get the feeling there are some on one side of the spectrum who believe anyone who says anything they disagree with is fostering a "climate of hate."

In response to Saturday's shooting spree in Tucscon, Rep. Peter King (R, N.Y.) has announced that he's planning on introducing legislation to make it illegal for American citizens to knowingly carry a firearm within 1,000 feet of a member of Congress

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:And the reactionaries in Congress are already at full force.

In response to Saturday's shooting spree in Tucscon, Rep. Peter King (R, N.Y.) has announced that he's planning on introducing legislation to make it illegal for American citizens to knowingly carry a firearm within 1,000 feet of a member of Congress

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:And the reactionaries in Congress are already at full force.

In response to Saturday's shooting spree in Tucscon, Rep. Peter King (R, N.Y.) has announced that he's planning on introducing legislation to make it illegal for American citizens to knowingly carry a firearm within 1,000 feet of a member of Congress

And some other dingbat wants to make it illegal to use crosshairs on members of congress in posters or pictures. I belive the guy backing that is a Dem.

Shit, that's a hell of an idea. If they'd have thought of it sooner this whole tragedy could have been prevented. If it had been illegal to get within 1000 feet of the congresswoman, that batshit crazy asshole who shot the place up would have never been able to get close enough to begin with. I mean, it would have been illegal, so there's no way he could do it. Right?